Bill would make voting mandatory

[auntAgonist]

By MARIA MCCLINTOCK, OTTAWA BUREAU

CANADIANS SHOULD be forced to vote in federal elections or face a hefty fine, a Liberal senator is proposing in draft legislation. Mac Harb has tabled amendments to the Canada Elections Act that would require all eligible voters to cast ballots. His bill, S-22, has cleared the first of the three required readings to become law.

"Despite its name, mandatory voting will actually enhance Canadians' rights," Harb said in a statement.

"Low turnout rates disenfranchise the most vulnerable in our country and this legislation will boost the legitimacy and efficacy of our democratic institutions."

Harb's bill is also proposing the ballot have a "none of the candidates" option.

Harb said he modelled his bill after the election voting model used in Australia where a fine is imposed on all citizens who fail to cast a ballot.

In the 2004 federal election voter turnout was 60.9%.


http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2005/01/01/803826-sun.html

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Wonder what it would take to see someting like that here in the USA!!!!

[auntAgonist]

2. As long as we have politicians (liars) like Shrub ..

who knows?

But I do like the idea.

It's the law in Australia I think (?).

[tx_dem41]

3. I know that the USSR had a similar system.

:eyes:

[nine23]

5. tx_dem41: If I didn't know better...

...I'd classify your statement ("I know that the USSR had a similar system.") as a "typical Republican knee-jerk response".

Relax. It's only an idea. You DO like new ideas, do you not?

By the way folks, Brazil is mandatory as well.

[tx_dem41]

7. Its a very old idea....

Australia has had it since the 1920s. Others since before that. How free can a person be when he MUST vote by threat of punishment by the Government? If that is a "typical Republican knee-jerk response" then you and I have different ideas what a Republican is.

And, please, cut out the personal attacks. Even in your cute, indirect manner, its against the rules of DU.

[alwynsw]

4. I've voted in every election since I turned 18 in 1974

This law is a bad, bad, BAD idea.

One of our freedoms is that which allows us to be utterly disinteresed in and to opt out of the political process.

Flame away.

edited to add: Imagine the backlash toward sponsor(s) of the bill, the Congress that passes it, and the President that signs it into law. Here's Joe Six-Pack: "I'll show their asses. They already close the bars and liquor stores for elections. Now I gotta drag my ass out in the cold, rain, sleet, snow, etc. to vote for a sumbitch I don't like or pay a fine. I'll just vote his/her ass out of office for the inconvenience."

[latteromden]

6. Nah, I don't think so. I've thought about this for a while, and it just

seems like the antithesis of democracy, forcing people to vote.

[BrklynLiberal]

9. How about having an option of "NONE OF THE ABOVE"

So the requirement is just that you show up..but not that you have to vote for one of the candidates.

[Bronco69]

12. I agree.

No one should be forced to vote. I do, however, like the none of the above option.

[illflem]

8. I'd rather see an mandatory literacy test required in the US

[tx_dem41]

10. We had that in the US before. In the South during the Jim Crow days..

many states kept African-Americans off the roles by requiring such a test. It was a great system from a Segregationist's viewpoint....keep schools separate, keep the poor schools poor in quality, keep the poor illiterate so they can't vote.

Absolutely wonderful. :eyes:

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[txindy]

14. We wouldn't want everyone voting in the USA now, would we?

We might actually get a true representation of what the people of this country want. Barring election fraud, of course. Then everyone, not just the neocons and their thugs, would have an actual voice in THEIR government.

Heaven forbid. :eyes:

[tx_dem41]

15. But then again...

we would live in a country where voting was compelled by threat of punishment by BIG Gov't. Nope, not for me.

[txindy]

16. Big government doesn't want us voting.

So, no worries there!

[forgethell]

13. What is the purpose

of such a bill?? If people aren't interested enough to vote, you have to assume they aren't interested enough to inform themselves about the issues. Do YOU want people like that making electoral decisions that will affect you and your loved ones?? 'Cause I sure as HELL don't.

[HamiltonHabs32]

17. intresting

It would be quite the law, it would literally force people to pay attention to politics which is fine by me, there are alot of people who simply dont care.

However that is their choice.

Otherwise it would make way for more smaller parties.

[iverglas]

18. !@#$%^&*(

I apologize. The sight of the words Mac Harb in print just makes me vomit.

Does anybody here even know who he is?? (That question wouldn't be fair even for Talking to Americans, given that probably 9,999 in 10,000 Canadians couldn't identify the weasel in question.)

He was the MP for Ottawa Centre (the riding where Parliament Hill itself is located) for an eon. He is a slimy, corrupt, stupid (like a fox) individual who got his seat by playing dirty politics (dead people did vote, in Ottawa Centre, and ethnic allegiances were exploited to the hilt -- Harb is Christian Lebanese himself) and who hung onto Chrétien's coat tails through thick and thin, thus earning himself a Senate seat on the downward slope of Jean's reign.

He did precisely fuck-all, for his riding or the country, throughout his entire worthless period of backbench-warming in the House. And the good burghers of Ottawa Centre are now represented by Ed Broadbent, the Liberals having been unable to hold the seat after his departure, even though their candidate was a nice guy and socially-left liberal with long service to the party.

So ... I have no strong opinion about mandatory voting legislation (which, as the article notes, is in force in Australia), but I'd probably oppose universal health care if Harb were proposing it. ;)

For anyone not familiar with the process --

His bill, S-22, has cleared the first of the three required readings to become law.

-- means pretty much nothing. Only the wildest and wooliest bills do not get first reading virtually automatically.



Mac (in the middle), shmoozing it up.

Okay, I admit, 25 years ago I thought he was cute. But then I thought Moammar Ghadaffi was cute.

[iverglas]

21. Mac Harb in action

I know it's tangential to the actual issue, but it's important to understand that nothing proposed by Mac Harb is going anywhere.

http://www.flora.org/flora/archive/mai-not/mp-mtg.htm

Meeting our MP on the MAI

MP: Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre
Time and date: 5pm, 10 Dec 1997.
Present: Terry Cottam, Henry McCandless, Madalena Santos and Bob Lamont.
All but Bob live in Mac Harb's riding.

We met beforehand for an hour to plan our questioning strategy. We then met for one hour in his office in Centre Block, Parliament Hill, with his assistant.

In general, Mac Harb was friendly, and passionately argued the rhetoric of globalization and free trade at every opportunity. He also evaded many of the questions put to him, very much like a Minister in Question Period.

He opened by saying that he was "fully familiar with" the MAI, yet at the end asked Terry Cottam for his copy to photocopy it for constituents, should they ask for it. We asked him instead to phone the clerk of the House committee that discussed the MAI. (This underscored the value of us bringing a copy of the draft MAI text to test out the MP's awareness of its contents.)

Mr. Harb had difficulty (either real or feigned) with the "who" question, from the equity statement idea (see Accountability Principles, http://mai.flora.org). By contrast, this was grasped instantly by the audience at a MAI debate at our local Unitarian Church in September, that the government should set out for citizens who would benefit from the MAI and who would bear what costs and risks.

<questions and answers follow>

CONCLUSION:

Mac Harb makes a good mini-case study in underscoring an elected representative's accountability for explaining the MAI. In this case, a loyal government party member who associates himself with business interests rather than community-building, and is unsympathetic to any position that smacks of "trade protectionism." Yet he argues the cause for literacy and education rights in Canada. He was, on the whole, uncooperative and somewhat patronizing in answering our questions, in the sense that he knew what we were getting at but didn't respond.

The man is a sneaky dullard.

[Pierre Trudeau]

19. well, the law requires us to file tax returns...

... if we're legally required to pay for our government, it's not a big stretch to assume that we be required to take some responsibility for it.

Really, I'm not so sure this is such a brilliant idea, but neither is it the kind of thing to infuriate me. I always vote anyway, so it wouldn't have any impact on me. Like a typical Canadian, I would just shrug my shoulders and take it. Although surely it would cost much more to enforce the fines than the govt. would ever collect.

If it were up to me, I would propose a bill whereby everyone who goes to the polls (either to vote or decline their ballot) receives a voucher for a free coffee & doughnut at Tim's.... and maybe a thank-you card from the Queen (or autographed photo of Avril Lavigne's butt, whichever you prefer).

Where's the Rhinoceros Party when you need them?? :(

[V. Kid]

20. this is not a good idea

I fully support civics classes and other ways to better inform the public of various candidates and what they stand for. As well as other things to increase civic awareness and participation. But one can't force people to vote, that's just dumb imo -- because in a democratic country people should have the right not to vote if they so desire.

Besides even though this isn't the main concern of those wanting this (hopefully) mandatory voting doesn't guarantee a progressive majority. Australia has mandatory voting and John Howard's Liberal-National Coalition got re-elected, and they are rather right-wing not to mention strong supporters of the war in Iraq.

I support a 'none of these' option -- but I just can't bring myself to support mandatory voting for a system that claims to be democratic.

[sonicx]

22. Probably not a good idea, but...

it would be interesting to see how many people would pick "none of the candidates"...